IMDb > Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Kill Bill: Vol. 1
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 214:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 2139 reviews in total 

341 out of 582 people found the following review useful:


Author: Emma from Sweden
1 March 2005

A lot of people have come up to me and said "How can you love Quentin that much, he is just too extreme!" or "Oh come on, Kill Bill is just SO not realistic.." Yes. No.

Mr. Quentin Tarantino is rather extreme, yes, and it's lovely! And No. Kill Bill is not realistic, but it's not meant to be realistic! Just like... Lord of the Rings, that's not realistic either! But because it has clear unreal elements, like wizards, it's acceptable?

You don't go to see Kill Bill, or any other Q.T-film to see "Stepmom", in the same way you don't go to a Marilyn Manson concert hoping that they will play some Spice Girls..

Kill Bill, both volume 1 and 2, is absolutely gorgeous! The art direction is beautiful! The camera angles are perfect... just Gorgeous! The lighting, the sound, the dialogs... and of course, the details! No one works with small details the way Quentin does. I must also say that the soundtrack is brilliant and the whole film is just so well casted! Uma Thurman is perfect in the leading role, Darryl Hannah has never been this good before, ever! And Chiaki Kuriyama, even though she has a quite small role, is excellent, even better than she is in "Battle Royale". David Carradine is painfully perfect, Michael Madsen is ALWAYS excellent, but never as good as when he works with Tarantino. I must also say that Sonny Chiba was great. I've never been a big fan of Vivica A Fox until now, and I used to think that Lucy Liu was just your average actor but she turned out to be fierce. Pretty much everyone who is in this film is ten times better than they've ever been.

But above all things, Kill Bill is artistic, beautiful... Perfect colors, perfect everything... gotta love it.

Was the above review useful to you?

249 out of 424 people found the following review useful:

Instant classic, but not for all audiences.

Author: The_Angry_Critic from Kunsan, South Korea
6 March 2005

I know it's a couple years late, but I had to write a review for some of the few people that haven't seen one of my favorite and refreshing I've seen over the last few years. Kill Bill Vol. 1 is yet another quality film of Tarantino's short, but distinguished list.

Kill Bill involves a nameless woman (Uma Thurman) who is slowing seeking revenge on her former hit squad the Viper Squad and her boss Bill (David Caradine.) Her former hit squad wronged her by gunning down her closest friends and family during her wedding and putting her into a coma while being pregnant. A few years later she awakens in a hospital, without child, and tries to track down each member of the squad. As the story progresses (through this film and the sequel), you find out who she really, why Bill wanted her dead and the fate of her daughter.

The movie is really a combination of Tarantino's love for the 70's over-dramatized Kung-Fu movie era and story of revenge with rich dialog. Yes, this movie is violent, but in a cheesy way. This created some controversy and really had audiences stirred up, failing to realize it was supposed to be over the top without no sense of realism. Like I said, it was supposed to be a tribute more so than a gruesome action flick. With all cheesiness aside, I can understand how some people could feel a little woozy after seeing someone lose an arm and having 4 gallons of Kool-Aid red blood shoot out of the body like a whale's blow hole. What really makes this movie is Tarantino ability to make bad to mediocre actors seem like good ones, a smart and hilarious dialog and a good storyline. Of course, this is what he does in pretty much in all of his movies.

There are various plot holes in the story, but we are really meant to ignore them unlike most movies. Just like the gory scenes, come to grips to the fact that the most of the implausibilities are there just to fill in the gaps of the movie. The movie also features a couple of classic Tarantino showdowns, including an unforgettable one with the Japanese infamous crime lord, O-Ren Ishii (Lucy Lui.) Once again, Tarantino puts his imagination at work again in his story telling by using some of his old techniques like jumping timelines and some new ones like adding Japanese animation for character backgrounds.

I wouldn't really recommend this film to someone who is really not from the Pulp Fiction era. This film is really just homage to flicks that frequently appear on Sunday Samurai Showcase, revenge and Tarantino's continuous fascination with Uma Thurman. This film contains extreme violence and sometimes strange dialog coupled with some pretty good acting and directing. If you're not a fan of Tarantino's films, you should pass on this one because it is doesn't stray to far from his other stuff. If you like his other works, this is a must see due to its originality and quality. And, if you just don't like Tarantino himself, and find him annoying like everybody else, I don't blame you but it's still worth your while seeing.

Was the above review useful to you?

57 out of 68 people found the following review useful:

Cinema has rarely been this exciting!

Author: gogoschka-1 from wherever good films play
28 October 2015

Having seen Tarantino's 3 previous films, going into the cinema, my expectations for 'Kill Bill' were already over the roof. However, regardless of my high hopes for quality entertainment, I was not prepared for this film. I was dumbfounded. I was blown away. I had quite simply never seen anything even remotely like it.

In 'Kill Bill', the revenge plot serves only as a larger story arc, thus allowing Tarantino to play with as many different genres as he likes, and boy - what a mix he dishes out! With complete disregard for the conventions of filmmaking, he paints an expressionistic masterpiece in his own unique style, the likes of which the world has never seen before. Cinema rarely gets this exciting. With 'Kill Bill', Tarantino proved once and for all that all the hype around his persona is justified: he IS the most daring, original - and entertaining! - filmmaker of his generation. Simply amazing: 10 stars out of 10.

Lesser-Known Masterpieces:

Favorite Low-Budget And B-Movies:

All-Time Favorite Films:

Was the above review useful to you?

197 out of 348 people found the following review useful:

This movie was brilliant!

Author: Rooster99 from Paris, France
14 March 2005

Man, what a film. As a fan of 70's martial arts movies, it was great to see all of the references. I also thought the use of B&W throughout was extremely effective. The cartoon sequences seemed a bit much, but did fit in with the overall feel of the film. I have seen many people posting about the sheer amount of blood and guts, but you have to remember this was Tarantino's homage to Bruce Lee-era action pictures. In those movies, the stories were very similar epics of revenge, and they never had much of a budget for good "gore" effects. It was more or less "throw some fake blood on the guy who just got killed" type of effects, which were duplicated accurately by some of the deaths in this movie. The plot also followed closely the plot of most 70's Kung Fu movies; something despicable happens to the weak hero (whole village razed, family slaughtered, etc..) and the hero goes away for years to learn the secrets of a particular style of Kung Fu. All of these movies contained the "secret move" which the master normally does not teach, except of course, in this rare instance. That move, as depicted in Kill Bill Vol. 2, is always used on the evil leader of the clan whom had brought death and chaos to the hero.

Kill Bill was a terrific modern take on those movies which were always set in ancient China. I was very impressed with Uma Thurman's swordplay, at no point did I feel that it looked scripted or fake. Even when fighting against more than 50 Crazy 8's, it replicated admirably the incredibly one-sided fights from some of the best martial arts movies made 30 years ago.

All in all, a great and original film! R.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

Tarantino's Blue Period is OVER!

Author: Roberto Bentivegna from Los Angeles, CA
10 October 2003

Just saw Kill Bill: Vol. 1 and was surprised, to be honest, at how incredibly GOOD this film is. Here is a craftsman (or artist, if you prefer) at the top of his game. Some of the shots are simply incredible; the score is, for the most part, vintage Tarantino selections- and the RZA does a very good job at filling the blanks; Uma Thurman is a great female lead, for sheer presence (and decent acting chops). Even Lucy Liu, who I expected was going to re-hash her Charlie's Angel character, burst on the scene like a flaming nunchuck.

The stringing together of the scenes was impeccable. The transitions, the intercutting between dialogue, the flashbacks... I simply could not get enough. Tarantino IS, indeed, having fun here. He is giving us a film that may not go down as a classic, Pulp Fiction style, but that shows us what is yet to come. I doubt that he's lost his writing talents (as some have claimed), and I actually disagree that the dialogue in the film is "poor", or that there are "no memorable lines" (Empire). The kung-fu genre has never been a particularly good park to display Shakespearean writing virtuosisms. The lines work fine. The plot is simple enough, but Tarantino takes a burger and serves it as "steak tartare with sauce au poivre and asparagus terrine". He basically manages to cram so much information into the film that plot is simply irrelevent. What is relevent is the Bride's thirst for blood, her primal sense of vengeance and our total devotion to her. Bill, of course, is one of the greatest characters to ever NOT appear on screen. Overall, a great movie and an example of how a filmmaker's tool is not his pen: it's his eye.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

one of the best films of all time

Author: A_Different_Drummer from North America
28 August 2016

Arguably this should not be a difficult film to review. It is nothing less than brilliant. The story, the direction, the musical score, the casting, the acting, the dialog, the fight choreography, the inset homage to past films ... brilliant.

Just brilliant.

What makes this film tricky to review is not the film but ironically the film-maker.

I do not know the deep background here but I am guessing that QT, at the very height of his creative powers, locked himself in a cabin in the woods for a month and put this opus together. And essentially (in the view of this reviewer) not only created one of the best films of all time but essentially defined his own career by setting a bar so high that even his own future work could not equal it.

And there you have it. The hard part of the review.

The film is perfection. But in my view QT has yet to produce anything that comes close either in terms of final product or even in terms of effort expended.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

You can't have one without the other

Author: calvinnme from United States
8 March 2017

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm only subtracting one star because either part one or part two taken alone seems incomplete, yet satisfying nonetheless. If they could have been merged into one film it would be the perfect combination of mystery, mythology, and exposition.

Uma Thurman was nominated for a Golden Globe as "The Bride," a woman who seeks revenge against the group of assassins, of whom she was once a member, who turned her wedding rehearsal into a bloodbath, killing everybody else in the wedding chapel and putting her into a coma for four years and having her awaken to an empty womb - she looked about eight months pregnant when Bill shot her. In volume one, although all five of the people involved in the massacre are on The Bride's hit list, she only kills two of them.The Bride goes after Vivica Fox's now-married housewife and mother, and Lucy Liu's Yakuza boss, which requires a trip to Japan. Tarantino pays homage to Japanese samurai films and Hong Kong martial arts films to make an entertaining story with excellent editing and soundtrack. A perfect start to what's to be expected in Vol. 2., which is where all of the backstories appear.

If you walk away from both parts one and two wondering if there is any symbolism in there, is what you thought you saw what you really saw, and what on earth does that last scene mean?...consider yourself in good company. And my only spoiler, why didn't Lucy Liu's character want to kill Bill as much as Uma Thurman's did? That is, if what you think you see implied in part one is indeed true.

This is Tarantino's best as far as I'm concerned. Every time I see either part one or part two on cable I'll stop what I'm doing and watch. Not recommended if you are squeamish though.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

About as silly as they get

Author: ljcjpjlj from Western New York
4 June 2004

Kill Bill (the first one) is the silliest movie I've seen in years! It's sillier than Blazing Saddles, sillier than a Monty Python movie. It is very cartoonish. Part of it even is cartoon, (although it's that highly stylized Japanese cartoon). Uma Thurman plays a good role, but I thought she used to be good looking. All the murder, mayhem, incredible martial arts, spurting blood, severed limbs, funny character names, and goofy plot twists will keep you munching your popcorn with great animation. This silly piece of fluff is filled with fantastic violence, totally unbelievable plots and characters. Keeping all that in mind, it is hilarious from beginning to end! I hope the sequel is as cutely charming.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 45 people found the following review useful:

it is kill something allright. but it isn't bill

Author: idonotexist from atl
19 December 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

******Spoilers*****and a lot of them too****

Since I am not a brainwashed cult follower of Quentin I was able to actually see the movie before rating it as the best thing ever made.

The first minutes were incredible, and I was having the time of my life. Opening scene in black and white bloodied Uma, then fade to black, melancholy music, fading out to perfection, suburbia (toys in yard, nice pretty house) then we have a funny as hell chick fight which is made all the better by a little kid that just stays there.. and says nothing. Basically the imagery is great and sets a mood. Then we have a flashback to the wedding, followed by a hospital scene giving some background of what just happened. And it ends.

The moment you see black mamba telling her big toe to move while the camera repeats this a few times, you have a problem. The first thing you realize in the frames after we finally stop zooming on the toes, is that well, this is nothing more than a Charlie's Angels rip. Concept and idea. Ok there is still time for salvation right? Not really. Because then comes an anime scene that has no purpose at all, and unless you are an anime fan, it will simply suck. Lots of animated blood, still motion drawings and all other things we have seen in countless anime toons on cartoon network come to life. You can safely skip it, not like something valuable will occur. Which is the problem with this whole movie. It has no coherence. You can watch it at any point and not miss a thing. But it gets worse.

Next on the murder list is the same girl we saw in the anime scene, and she is in Japan. So Black Mamba goes to Japan, and what follows for the other half of the movie is mindless kung fu that is bad, a lot of stupid time wasting moments of Japanese people speaking Japanese wise words, which are translated in annoying captions. Actually that would have been a nice touch, but they literally NEVER end. Japanese. Subtititles. More useless preaching. Wise men advice. Captions. Japanese. Captions. Repeat.

Although it is basically badly executed kung fu, even it suffers from some pretty obvious faults. Booze drinking schoolgirl uniform wearing underage female guard? Come on. And just to mention the tie wearing, sword swinging guards (samurai?) that just keep on coming. Please its a parody. A pathetic attempt to mix the infamous Japanese gangs of the 80s and 90s with ancient kung fu and traditions. At least that's the best I could make of it.

I am not going to guess what that movie was trying to be because it clearly had no point. It started great, it fell apart in about 2 minutes. Literally 2 minutes and that is even sadder.

Save your time, watch the first thirty minutes, then go rent a real kung fu flick to fill in the rest.

Was the above review useful to you?

152 out of 299 people found the following review useful:

The problem with Tarantino

Author: stefano1488 from Italy
8 November 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


First of all, let me warn you. I've always detested Tarantino, so I didnt'go see this film free of prejudice.

That said, I can't think of a worse film I've seen lately, except "The Matrix Reloaded". The reason is that Tarantino shows too much violence, and that he doesn't show anything else. "But that's the point!" some will say. The point of what? Ok, lets' make a film and let's show a rape and say that that's the point. Does that mean that the film is good?

Tarantino has always been overrated (I disliked "Pulp Fiction" as well). The reason is that he manages to feel unconventional and artsy, so many will feel smart by saying that he's a genius, that his films are masterpieces and all that crap. The plain truth is that he's either a sadistic voyeur or a cunning man who's found a way to make pots of money by exploiting people's naivety. Or both.

Although I don't like gore or black humour, I sometimes appreciate it (eg some films with Vincent Price). The point is trivial, but worth making: black humour has to be, well, humorous. The problem with Tarantino is that he's nothing. A vacuum.

Some reviewers have said that if you don't understand what this film is about, you just won't get it; that it's a mockery and so on. The problem is that if one treats himself to shallow, uninspired, unoriginal, uninventive films, who are shot chiefly for the purpose of using some glitzy special effects and for solvin someone's money problems for the rest of his life, you may find such a film creative or inspired, instead of just the trick it is.

Tarantino is in quotations. He quotes all the time. But a film full of quotations and references is a trick that is worth doing once or twice. After that, it can't hide any more the outright lack of creativity that hides behind the references.

If you watch a gory b-movie (or any b-movie, for that matter), you may like it, even love it, but you'd never go so far as to claim it's a work of "art". Tarantino is "hip" (for the time being), so it's fashionable to call this lame director a genius.

But time will tell.

Remember David Lynch.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 214:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history